As a historian I think that the rise to power of the Nazis is one of the most important topics to teach. There has been a lot of debate about too many schools doing too much 'Hitler' and it is an easy trap to fall into. Personally I find the rise to power stuff far more interesting than the rest in that it allows students to look at the nature of elections and democracy - including its' potential faults. I also want students to realise that Germans are normal people and very similar to us - they are not intrinsically evil.
This is one of my favourite exercises to run and I do it every year with Yr 9. I have just finished it with 2 groups and the results have been the most impressive and thought-provoking I have done.
Students start off with a simple cloze exercise to give an outline of the situation in Germany in 1932. I stick the answers around the room hidden under tables, behind filing cabinets etc to liven up the traditional cloze exercise. I then discussed with students what people would be unhappy about in Germany and students were given a sheet showing a brick wall on which they were allowed to write 1932 German grafitti - a risk I know but actually the responses from the kids were great. Surprisingly no swear words.
I then gave each student 1 of 5 profiles. Each profile titled Mr A, Mr B etc described a stereotypical German from 1932 and included a former soldier now unemployed, a mother of 4, a Jewish businessman, a disillusioned young man and an industrialist, and outlined their main views and problems. Students had to come up with a list of things that would make this person's life better. All students who had looked at the same person joined up to add their views to a combined list.
Students were then put into 5 groups and informed that they were now the 5 political parties that would contest the 1932 election. Their 1st task was to come up with a name, colour, slogan and symbol for their party. Over the next 3 lessons each group had to put together an election campaign including a speech, party manifesto and extras - posters, leaflets, badges etc. The groups were encouraged to go for something original in their campaign. 1 group had the slogan - "stepping to a brighter future" and made 30 footprints with the name of each student in the class on and laid them on the floor leading to an election box at the front of the room. Some groups bought chocolates and made cakes. The energy and enthusiasm from all the students was superb. Each lesson had a particular "extra" to focus attention - a radio interview, a visit from one of the people profiled at the beginning (another teacher!).
Election day itself saw some fantastic speeches and campaign presentations. Students were given back their original profiles and at the end of each presentation they had to judge it in role as A, B, C etc. They seemed to handle this dual role really well and although there were lots of shouts of "Can we vote for ourselves?" they did respond in role. At the end of the presentations each student was given a ballot paper and allowed to vote in secret. Votes were counted and the winners announced to much excitement.
The following lesson was the more important one for me. Each student was given a sheet of paper with the 5 profiles on and a box in the middle. The promises from the winning group were put in the box in the middle and students drew lines from each of the 5 Germans to specific promises which would have appealed to them. The reverse of the sheet was identical but this time I used a powerpoint which gave 1 at a time the promises made by the Nazi party in 1932 - with each of my Yr 9 groups the promises were identical. They had made the same promises as the Nazi Party. The final 'reveal' and 'sucker punch' was when I unveiled the name of the party from 1932 - the Nazi Party. Students were genuinely shocked - there was one of those brilliant moments when there was silence followed by a deep intake of breath. 1 student said she actually felt disgusted with herself - a tough reaction but a really powerful one. The discussion which followed was inspirational with students asking perceptive questions about how people had voted and the similarities between their experience and 1932.
This was one of those lessons that made you realise why being a teacher is so important. If anyone is interested I can email all the resources I used for this activity.
Sunday 20 February 2011
Saturday 12 February 2011
The Secret of Really Good Teaching
I am an Advanced Skills Teacher and arrogant and conceited enough to believe I am a really good teacher. The thing is, I don't believe I have any special talent or ability that makes me special, gifted or particularly suited to teaching. I just work really hard at it!
I believe that the secret to really good teaching is dead simple - planning. After 21 years I still plan every lesson. I like lesson planning. I feel it is a creative process: putting together a good, purposeful, inspiring lesson to me is not that different from an artist painting a picture, a musician playing a tune or a writer penning a story.
Four of my last five lesson observations have been rated "Outstanding" - and the fact that one of them wasn't hurt like hell. I do a lot of INSETsessions with teachers on VAKD and teaching strategies and often get the response "Oh but you can't be outstanding and all singing and dancing every lesson". And I think - why not? Who says you can't? I do plan every lesson with the intention that it will be an outstanding lesson. I go into the room, every lesson, with the intention that it will be outstanding. Of course - it isn't every lesson - but should that stop me from trying for it?
I know that lesson planning takes time. It should be the number one priority for every teacher when they are not actually in the classroom, teaching. I have met very few lazy teachers. The vast majority of us work really hard and like working hard - we generally have a very positive work ethic - but we all have only a certain number of hours that we can devote to the job. I believe that the bulk of that time should be spent on planning - not other things.
If a teacher is not planning their lessons, the school should ask the question: "What is stopping them?" If it is because they don't know how to plan outstanding lessons - then help them. Give them more time and match them up with other teachers. If it is because they are too busy doing other things related to school - take that other work away. What is more likely to improve the educational experience of a child on Monday morning? The hour Mr F spent planning the lesson or the hour he spent analysing data, writing reports, doing marking or planning strategy? The biggest single factor in improving a child's performance in school is the teacher planning and delivering outstanding lessons more often. Just think how amazing schools would be if 75% of all lessons every day were outstanding. If I can be outstanding - anyone can. They just have to be prepared to work at it.
Oh - and if a teacher is not planning their lessons because they believe they don't need to - get them out of this profession. They don't deserve to be in it and our children deserve better.
I believe that the secret to really good teaching is dead simple - planning. After 21 years I still plan every lesson. I like lesson planning. I feel it is a creative process: putting together a good, purposeful, inspiring lesson to me is not that different from an artist painting a picture, a musician playing a tune or a writer penning a story.
Four of my last five lesson observations have been rated "Outstanding" - and the fact that one of them wasn't hurt like hell. I do a lot of INSETsessions with teachers on VAKD and teaching strategies and often get the response "Oh but you can't be outstanding and all singing and dancing every lesson". And I think - why not? Who says you can't? I do plan every lesson with the intention that it will be an outstanding lesson. I go into the room, every lesson, with the intention that it will be outstanding. Of course - it isn't every lesson - but should that stop me from trying for it?
I know that lesson planning takes time. It should be the number one priority for every teacher when they are not actually in the classroom, teaching. I have met very few lazy teachers. The vast majority of us work really hard and like working hard - we generally have a very positive work ethic - but we all have only a certain number of hours that we can devote to the job. I believe that the bulk of that time should be spent on planning - not other things.
If a teacher is not planning their lessons, the school should ask the question: "What is stopping them?" If it is because they don't know how to plan outstanding lessons - then help them. Give them more time and match them up with other teachers. If it is because they are too busy doing other things related to school - take that other work away. What is more likely to improve the educational experience of a child on Monday morning? The hour Mr F spent planning the lesson or the hour he spent analysing data, writing reports, doing marking or planning strategy? The biggest single factor in improving a child's performance in school is the teacher planning and delivering outstanding lessons more often. Just think how amazing schools would be if 75% of all lessons every day were outstanding. If I can be outstanding - anyone can. They just have to be prepared to work at it.
Oh - and if a teacher is not planning their lessons because they believe they don't need to - get them out of this profession. They don't deserve to be in it and our children deserve better.
Tuesday 8 February 2011
Creating, and destroying a capitalist society - in 1 double lesson
I had one of those brilliant experiences today - a lesson that took on a life of its own and became a fantastic learning experience. This was a mixed ability Year 10 group of 22 students, studying GCSE Modern World History and beginning a unit on the Cold War. The aim was to try to get students to get to grips with the concept of capitalism and. like all my best lessons, was nicked from another teacher.
Each student was given 4 normal playing cards at random. 2 students volunteered to play the part of the "bank". The aim for each student was to trade their cards to get a winning hand. Winning hands were as follows: 3 cards of the same suit - 3 points; 3 cards of same value - 3points; 3 cards of any suit in a run (i.e. 2,3,4) - 3points; 3 cards in a run of same suit - 6 points. Whenever students had a winning hand they must go to the bank who would keep a running score of their total and give out 3 new cards. Students should trade cards with anyone else 'blind' - seeing only back of cards. The first round lasted 10 minutes. At the end of the round the bankers added up the scores - the 2 students with the highest score were invited to step outside the classroom and were allowed to either change 1 rule or add in a new one. At the end of each round the 3or 4 students with the highest score could add/change rules. As teacher I play no part at all and just kept observational notes of what happened.
I have run this experiment before but not for a few years and not with this type of result. In the 1st round every kid played and thoroughly enjoyed what they were doing. At the end of the stage 2 girls 'won' with a score of 24 points. They decided to introduce a new rule that they did not have to queue at the bank - long time waiting to bank scores was a big problem. All students continued to play the 2nd round although there were a few minor grumbles about the top 2. At the end of the round the top 2 girls had extended their lead and were joined by a boy who had also scored quite well. They decided that in the next round all other students had to show the top 3 their cards before they traded. This took us to the end of the first hour - and a 15 minute break. All the students were still thoroughly enjoying themselves but some were refusing to follow the latest rule and were starting to refuse to trade. Despite this the top 3 students had extended their lead. After break, things got really interesting. The top 3 decided that any student who refused to trade would be sent out of the classroom as punishment. Very quickly almost all the class were in the corridor whilst a small number were still playing. The group in the corridor began to call themselves the Resistance and a real sense of rebellion grew. At the end of the round the top 3 were still in the lead but had noticed they weren't scoring as well with most students not involved. They decided to double all points values if students obeyed the rules but no point if they refused to play. The top 3 were unfortunately unaware of the fact that the rest of the students had made a secret deal with the bankers that meant any points the top 3 earned in the next round would be taken off their total rather than added on. This final round was hilarious with the top 3 happily adding to their scores whilst the rest stood in the corridor. The final results were brilliant - the top 3 were still just in the lead but had had their scores greatly reduced.
The last 20 minutes of the lesson involved me feeding back on what I had observed. We had started with equality. Very quickly the highest scoring (richest) were making rules that only benefitted themselves and were intent on gettting richer. The lowest scoring (the masses) grew resentful, started to unite together, incited rebellion and carried out acts of sabotage and revolution! All of this came from the students who were then discussing the merits and drawbacks of capitalism and comparing it to communism. I must add - this is not a grammar school or academy or top set. This is a mixed ability group of normal Cornish kids - who had a great time developing their political, economic and historical understanding. No facts - so Michael Gove would have hated it.
Each student was given 4 normal playing cards at random. 2 students volunteered to play the part of the "bank". The aim for each student was to trade their cards to get a winning hand. Winning hands were as follows: 3 cards of the same suit - 3 points; 3 cards of same value - 3points; 3 cards of any suit in a run (i.e. 2,3,4) - 3points; 3 cards in a run of same suit - 6 points. Whenever students had a winning hand they must go to the bank who would keep a running score of their total and give out 3 new cards. Students should trade cards with anyone else 'blind' - seeing only back of cards. The first round lasted 10 minutes. At the end of the round the bankers added up the scores - the 2 students with the highest score were invited to step outside the classroom and were allowed to either change 1 rule or add in a new one. At the end of each round the 3or 4 students with the highest score could add/change rules. As teacher I play no part at all and just kept observational notes of what happened.
I have run this experiment before but not for a few years and not with this type of result. In the 1st round every kid played and thoroughly enjoyed what they were doing. At the end of the stage 2 girls 'won' with a score of 24 points. They decided to introduce a new rule that they did not have to queue at the bank - long time waiting to bank scores was a big problem. All students continued to play the 2nd round although there were a few minor grumbles about the top 2. At the end of the round the top 2 girls had extended their lead and were joined by a boy who had also scored quite well. They decided that in the next round all other students had to show the top 3 their cards before they traded. This took us to the end of the first hour - and a 15 minute break. All the students were still thoroughly enjoying themselves but some were refusing to follow the latest rule and were starting to refuse to trade. Despite this the top 3 students had extended their lead. After break, things got really interesting. The top 3 decided that any student who refused to trade would be sent out of the classroom as punishment. Very quickly almost all the class were in the corridor whilst a small number were still playing. The group in the corridor began to call themselves the Resistance and a real sense of rebellion grew. At the end of the round the top 3 were still in the lead but had noticed they weren't scoring as well with most students not involved. They decided to double all points values if students obeyed the rules but no point if they refused to play. The top 3 were unfortunately unaware of the fact that the rest of the students had made a secret deal with the bankers that meant any points the top 3 earned in the next round would be taken off their total rather than added on. This final round was hilarious with the top 3 happily adding to their scores whilst the rest stood in the corridor. The final results were brilliant - the top 3 were still just in the lead but had had their scores greatly reduced.
The last 20 minutes of the lesson involved me feeding back on what I had observed. We had started with equality. Very quickly the highest scoring (richest) were making rules that only benefitted themselves and were intent on gettting richer. The lowest scoring (the masses) grew resentful, started to unite together, incited rebellion and carried out acts of sabotage and revolution! All of this came from the students who were then discussing the merits and drawbacks of capitalism and comparing it to communism. I must add - this is not a grammar school or academy or top set. This is a mixed ability group of normal Cornish kids - who had a great time developing their political, economic and historical understanding. No facts - so Michael Gove would have hated it.
Sunday 6 February 2011
Philosophy of Teaching
I believe that every good teacher should have their own defined philosophy of teaching. Teaching is the most important job in the world - no contest with anything else. All of us who step into the classroom each day are honoured - to do this job is a privilege. I know that sounds kind of crap - but I also believe it is true and that we should know why we are doing it and what we are trying to achieve.
My philosophy in teaching is that students should leave my classroom with more questions than answers. Every student who comes into my room should say something in every lesson, do something in every lesson and be challenged. I want my lessons to be an experience that students will remember. I want every student in my classroom to really feel that they are part of the lesson and not just an observer of it. I want students to be puzzled, confused and pushed to the point of almost breaking - that point where they reach cognitive dissonance and don't know what the hell is coming next or where its' coming from - but want to get there. I want every student to change seat at least once in every lesson so they can change perspective and viewpoint and experience. I want every student to be talking about the lesson as they walk out of the room.
This is my philosophy of teaching - it is my aim and intention in preparing every lesson. I know I won't always get there - but that doesn't stop me trying for it every day. I don't know if anyone else likes or agrees with my philosophy of teaching - and don't really care. If your philosophy of teaching is different - great. If you haven't got one - should you really be doing this job?
My philosophy in teaching is that students should leave my classroom with more questions than answers. Every student who comes into my room should say something in every lesson, do something in every lesson and be challenged. I want my lessons to be an experience that students will remember. I want every student in my classroom to really feel that they are part of the lesson and not just an observer of it. I want students to be puzzled, confused and pushed to the point of almost breaking - that point where they reach cognitive dissonance and don't know what the hell is coming next or where its' coming from - but want to get there. I want every student to change seat at least once in every lesson so they can change perspective and viewpoint and experience. I want every student to be talking about the lesson as they walk out of the room.
This is my philosophy of teaching - it is my aim and intention in preparing every lesson. I know I won't always get there - but that doesn't stop me trying for it every day. I don't know if anyone else likes or agrees with my philosophy of teaching - and don't really care. If your philosophy of teaching is different - great. If you haven't got one - should you really be doing this job?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)